|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,788 Year: 4,045/9,624 Month: 916/974 Week: 243/286 Day: 4/46 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Potential Evidence for a Global Flood | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
1) As well preserved at the top as at the bottom? That doesn't sound like a flood to me. If there are trees fossilised in situ both at the top and the bottom of the formation, they cannot have deposited in a single event. At least, not unless antediluvian trees grew in mid air. What you describe is only consistent with gradual deposition of layer upon layer. No individual layer would have taken millions of years to form, but nor could it have been formed as quickly as you suggest. Such a formation could not possibly have been caused by a single huge flood. Dr Adequate, in message 237 writes: 1) As well preserved at the top as at the bottom? That doesn't sound like a flood to me. If there are trees fossilised in situ both at the top and the bottom of the formation, they cannot have deposited in a single event. I think he means at the top and the bottom of the tree. Which is in fact not usually true --- the roots are well-preserved and the leaves are not. My "bolding". I agree with the "bolded" sentence. I almost missed the distinction between that and Granny's interpretation. I think DA is interpreting the phrase "as well preserved at the top as at the bottom" a little to literally (aka nitpicking). I think the trunk tops and even branches may be well preserved, but expecting leave preservation is going a bit far. Now the strata containing the root systems and the strata containing the higher parts of the trees are certainly two different things, and I don't think Just Being Real is trying to say otherwise. The higher parts of the trees may or may not have been buried in a single event. Burial may have taken minutes, or it may have taken hundreds of years. Looking at the details, including the nature of the rock, would probably tell you which was the case. Now different tree horizons at completely different stratagraphic levels are another thing. You are not going to get root system paleosoils covered by some sort of "flood event", then stratigraphicly higher up root system paleosoils covered by some sort of "flood event", all from the same "flood event". [sarcasm] Except in the case of "THE GREAT FLOOD", which is capable of doing any type of geologic deposits, regardless of how complex.[/sarcasm] Please, no replies to the [sarcasm][/sarcasm] part. Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 3.8 |
Hi Moose,
Hopefully JBR will clarify for us. If he did mean that the tops of the trees where well preserved then that would be odd. Mostly because a) they're not; and b) we wouldn't expect them to be well preserved had they been exposed to a global deluge, we'd expect them to be stripped bare.
Now different tree horizons at completely different stratagraphic levels are another thing. You are not going to get root system paleosoils covered by some sort of "flood event", then stratigraphicly higher up root system paleosoils covered by some sort of "flood event", all from the same "flood event". I agree and further, it is very easy to point to examples of this; multiple layers of paleosoil, with plant fossils standing vertically in them, with roots attached, lying layer upon layer. I would be very interested to hear how JBR would square this with a global flood.
Please, no replies to the [sarcasm][/sarcasm] part. Spoilsport! Mutate and Survive
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4395 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
All one need imagine is segregated flows within a tremendous chaos of moving water. This probably from the moving continents going on during stages in the flood year.
I want to find different layered strata.First this layer and then another from hundreds of miles away and then some volcanic layer and so on. One can imagine whole provinces being lifted up and moved intack some distance and placed over a layer.Such power could hold in place, here and there, standing trees . The strata of these things looks just like what it looks.A great power moving and placing segregated earthforms on top of each other. Why not? why invoke unlikely endless events doing unlikely things.Especially when we have a witness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10073 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
why invoke unlikely endless events doing unlikely things I can think of one unlikely event producing unlikely things. Chaotic waters like you propose do not make laminated sediments of fine clay and diatoms. Only annual processes in temperate climates do this as diatoms bloom in the warm seasons and clay dominates in the cold seasons. In Lake Suigetsu, we find hundreds of thousands of these annual layers, one on top of another, uninterrupted by a global flood. The flood is falsified.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 311 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
why invoke unlikely endless events doing unlikely things. Geologists invoke the processes of sedimentation which we can observe today. These are not "unlikely", because they happen. Creationist invoke a process that no-one has ever seen, which is known not to have happened, and which is, moreover, impossible. That is unlikely.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4395 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
In each case it works.
If it happened all at once then all one needs to see is segregated flows etc.You have to admit its segregation that is shown. Then you say annual events. Yet clay need not be annual if there is mechanism to segregate it. Its unlikely these lakes , even, were from annual events.It was just a event or few that created all the segregated layers. Just because annual events can make these layers is not evidence this is what happened in these deposits.nor is it prrof that thats all that can happen. All one finds is layers laid by a layering process.A chaotic flow structure could do this too. In the great mega floods of recent Iceland they only lately discovered that PULSES of water could make layers of sediment in a quick single event.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4395 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
The geologist is to discover the truth.
Just figuring things out by present processes only works if non present processes are indeed impossible. Other processes can and would exist in special conditions. Only if its impossible for special conditions to produce these results can there be confidence in the conclusions from ordinary observed processes. Since its all about layers then its all about layers being laid.Increase the layering mechanism and one has a way to account for instant many layered sediment structures. A line of reasoning.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
saab93f Member (Idle past 1421 days) Posts: 265 From: Finland Joined: |
Im sorry Robert but I could not understand anything you said.
Geologists are specialists - they know how to interpret the data. Paleontologist know their business just as well as archeologists do theirs. Not a single scientist has ever suggested that Nascar-continents and the flud wouldve taken place at all and moreso that theyd happened simultaneously. That is the problem of the cretin - they have a fixed view on what and how has happened and there is no limits to the leght they are willing to distort the data and facts to adhere to that. Creationism (the flood geology os catastrophic geology included) is based on ignorance and lying to people. There is and never has been a single piece of evidence that would justify that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 311 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
The geologist is to discover the truth. Just figuring things out by present processes only works if non present processes are indeed impossible. Other processes can and would exist in special conditions. Only if its impossible for special conditions to produce these results can there be confidence in the conclusions from ordinary observed processes. Since its all about layers then its all about layers being laid.Increase the layering mechanism and one has a way to account for instant many layered sediment structures. A line of reasoning. You claimed that the processes invoked by geologists are "unlikely". Am I to understand that you now admit that they are the "present processes" that actually occur? If so, I shall carry on and analyze the new errors that you have introduced in this post.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
I know, I know, it's useless responding to him, but I'll give it a go.
Robert Byers writes: I guess that’s why mining companies employ me provide a model of their deposits. They do go and check if my models reflect reality. it costs them a lot of money. If it doesn’t meet reality, I loose my job. The geologist is to discover the truth. Robert Byers writes: Evidence (the rocks themselves) indicate that the same processes we observe today also occurred in the past. It’s amazing what studying evidence can do! Just figuring things out by present processesRobert Byers writes: You mean things like gravity ceased to exist in the past for a while? Magic? only works if non present processes are indeed impossible. Robert Byers writes: Gravity doesn’t cease to exist, even under very special conditions. Are you referring to magic? Other processes can and would exist in special conditions. Robert Byers writes: Magic can produce anything. It isn’t science. Don’t even pretend that it is science. Only if its impossible for special conditions to produce these results can there be confidence in the conclusions from ordinary observed processes. Robert Byers writes: Huh? I don’t really understand, but not all geology is about layers. In fact, a lot of geology is about batoliths and dykes and sills and metamorphyses and pypes, etc. Since its all about layers then its all about layers being laid. Robert Byers writes: It is well understood how "layering mechanisms" could be increased. Lots of ways. Decreased too. Lots of ways. Are you referring to more water, less water, deeper water, shallower water, faster moving water, slower moving water, more wind, less wind, faster moving wind, slower moving wind, a bigger sea, a smaller sea, a shallower sea, a deeper sea, a faster stream, a slower stream, a shallower stream, a deeper stream, a lagoon, an open sea, turbidite deposits in lakes, turbidite deposits in oceans, delta front deposits, braided river deposits, glacial deposits, etc? Combinations of all of the above? What do you mean exactly? We do know what deposits resulting from each of these processes look like. No magic involved. Increase the layering mechanism..Robert Byers writes: Instant many layered sediments? Doesn’t make sense. Can you give us an example of this? I mean, we can see sediments currently forming in one instant. You can even do it at home. Fill a bottle with sand and water. Shake. Leave for a few minutes. Voila. .. and one has a way to account for instant many layered sediment structures. Robert Byers writes: Sorry, lots of things in your post don’t make any sense at all. Your last sentence, for example, is Greek to me and I don’t speak Greek. A line of reasoning. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : Spelling baaaad!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 761 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
One can imagine whole provinces being lifted up and moved intack some distance and placed over a layer. Such power could hold in place, here and there, standing trees . Newfoundland on top of Manitoba? You might be able to imagine that, but the rest of us here don't have access to whatever it is that you are smoking, Robert. Clarify for me, if you would, how moving water is going to pick up a slab of soil, with trees, and move it "hundreds of miles.""The Christian church, in its attitude toward science, shows the mind of a more or less enlightened man of the Thirteenth Century. It no longer believes that the earth is flat, but it is still convinced that prayer can cure after medicine fails." H L Mencken
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22492 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Coragyps writes: Clarify for me, if you would, how moving water is going to pick up a slab of soil, with trees, and move it "hundreds of miles." Even if we give Robert the benefit of the doubt and tell him, "Floods moving entire landscapes intact hundreds of miles, okay, sure," he still needs to provide evidence that that's what actually happened. When figuring out what happened in the past Geologists always use evidence to choose between many possibilities. But Robert doesn't care about evidence. In his mind if he can describe it and it explains the Biblical account, then not only is evidence unnecessary, the evidence that something else happened can be ignored. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10073 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
If it happened all at once then all one needs to see is segregated flows etc.
Fine clay particles do not settle out of flows. You need still waters for this. Also, you need an entire warm season to produce just one layer of diatoms. Your flood model can not explain this.
Its unlikely these lakes , even, were from annual events.
We observe lakes producing them now. Not only is it likely, it is happening right now.
Just because annual events can make these layers is not evidence this is what happened in these deposits.
Yes, it is evidence. That's the whole point. We observe lakes producing alternating layers of diatoms and fine clay sediments right here and now. We observe hundreds of thousands of these layers in lakes, uninterrupted by any global flood. We observe that chaotic flows do not allow for the settling of fine clay and diatoms. I think the conclusion is very clear.
All one finds is layers laid by a layering process. A chaotic flow structure could do this too. No, they can't. Fine clay particles can not settle out of chaotic flowing waters. They flow with the water. That is why you have deltas in rivers that empty into the ocean. As the flowing waters stop they dump the fine clay sediments that were flowing with the water. Also, you need to account for hundreds of thousands of years worth of diatom growth in a single flood year. That doesn't work either. Even worse, you need to explain the 14C dating of insect and leaf debris found in these layers. They are consistent with annual processes as well, as discussed here by our very own RAZD: http://razd.evcforum.net/Age_Dating.htm#Lake_Suigetsu_Varves So there are three falsifications of a global flood here: 1. Fine sediments found in these layers can not be laid down by chaotic flowing waters. 2. Hundreds of thousands of years worth of diatom growth. 3. 14C dating of organic material is consistent with annual deposition.
In the great mega floods of recent Iceland they only lately discovered that PULSES of water could make layers of sediment in a quick single event.
Layers of what type of sediment? If it wasn't alternating layers of fine clay sediments and diatoms that sorted insect and leaf debris by tiny differences in 14C then you haven't addressed the evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Taq writes: [sarcasm]The flood was different. We had thousands of seasons in that year. Remember anything was possible. That's evidence for the flood![/sarcasm]
Also, you need to account for hundreds of thousands of years worth of diatom growth in a single flood year.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10073 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
[sarcasm]The flood was different. We had thousands of seasons in that year. Remember anything was possible. That's evidence for the flood![/sarcasm]
[sarcasm]The flood was so different that it was able to sort all of the freshwater diatoms in one deposit and all of the marine phytoplankton in another. Amazing, isn't it!!![/sarcasm]
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024